click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
, we can do some things around the iranians. impeded the access of the world to energy by causing incident in the gulf terry we cannot -- in the gulf, which our navy can overcome. we cannot prevent insurance companies from quadrupling the costs of acquiring energy. there is an enormously negative impact on the global economy. particularly in asia. every adjourning area next to iran is susceptible to a local war which used to be called people's war. passivelyus to be friendly, expecting soviet reactions. likelyasked what is the soviet reaction by the president of the united states? they may state border incidents, we have had lots of them. then he says they may invade us from mongolia where they have 22 armored divisions and strike southward towards beijing directly. he says we will use people's war, and i know what he meant. the kind of things we experienced also. people's wars do not end quickly. we are not going to kill all iranians. inn if they do these things the region. the protracted conflict will make this experience a bit -- make this experience of a decade ago seemed like
between having a good education and getting a job. secondly, we need a national energy policy to ensure that we have clean and inexpensive energy across the long-term. if you look at the history of successful economies, the two most important numbers are the cost of money and the cost of energy. third, we have to reform our immigration system and, fourth, we have to invest in our infrastructure. to do these things requires investments. and we will fundamentally not be able to make these investments unless we, as i said, reform our entitlement programs and raise revenues. we're confronted with two choices in our budgets. and these are insufficient choices. the american people deserve better. on one hand we have a choice where we don't recognize the reality of where the entitlement programs are going. and then the other choice is we slash and cut the critical investments we need to make to have a future. we can do better. each party likes to take the high ground on a balanced approach. but what does that really mean? to me a balanced approach means several things. first, we need additiona
energy stores that we have here so we can be energy independent. we have vast amounts of energy reserves we need to tap so we can put people to work, bring down gas prices, stretch paychecks further. we've got to control our spending appetite. we've got to reform programs like medicare so they're solvent. we've got to reform our safety net so it works to get people on their feet. that's what this budget does. in a nutshell, instead of spending $46 trillion over the next 10 years, as we're currently poised to spend, we spend $41 trillion. instead of growing spending 5% a year we grow at 3.4% a year. with all the predictions of doom and gloom and how evil and terrible and horrible or budget is, it increases spending every year by 3.4% a year instead of 5% a year. the difference is we balance the budget. the difference is we let families keep more of their own take-home pay. the difference is we make sure our kids inherit a debt-free future. the difference is we do what's necessary to create a healthy economy, more take-home pay, faster economic growth and better jobs. that's why we're here
on a personal note. i know how valuable the time and energy is of the american president, yourself. this is the 10th time we have met since you became president and since i became prime minister. you have chosen israel is your fort and then you -- venue your foreign visit and your second term. thank you for the investment you have made in our relationship and in strengthening that friendship and alliance between our two countries. it is deeply appreciated. you have come here on the eve of passover. i've always considered it it as our most cherished holiday. it celebrates the jewish passage from slavery to freedom. has alsohe ages, it inspired people struggling for freedom, including the founding fathers of the united states. it is a profound honor to host you, the leader of the free world, at this historic time in our ancient capital. mr. president, welcome to israel and jerusalem. [applause] thank you. thank you, prime minister netanyahu, for your kind words and your warm welcome. i want to express a special thanks to sarah and your two sons for their warmth and hospitality. it wa
of acquiring energy. there is an enormously negative impact on the global economy. particularly in asia. every adjourning area next to iran is susceptible to a local war which used to be called people's war. he wanted us to be passively friendly, expecting soviet reactions. likelyasked what is the soviet reaction by the president of the united states? they may state border incidents, we have had lots of them. usn he says they may invade from mongolia where they have 22 armored divisions and strike southward towards beijing directly. he says we will use people's war, and i know what he meant. the kind of things we experienced also. people's wars do not adequately . do not end quickly. we are not going to kill all iranians. even if they do these things in the region. the protracted conflict will make this experience a bit -- make this experience of a decade ago seemed like a trifle. therefore i am worried by we are trying to buy off this pressure the president is feeling for commitments to military action against iran without fully contemplating the large scale geopolitical consequences, the aff
the party failed to harness the energy and enthusiasm of people who identify with the tea party? >> i do not think so. we control the house today because of the tea party. we gained because we had these new voters. i came into the republican party in 1984 from the democratic party. i was a reagan democrat. i changed, and at that time there was a lot of friction inside the party from these conservative democrats from the south and ethnic democrats in the northeast and midwest coming into the republican party, and we won. in 1994, a lot of perot voters were coming in. we'd won here we have had this tea party coming in, and there is friction, but we won the in the midterm. i think we will win again in the next midterm. i do not think friction inside a party is a sign of dynamism, and the fact is over time this friction will ease a little bit and the focus will be on how to weave when against democrats. -- how do we win against the democrats. >> if friction is good, it is overrated. i am glad that it is you all. in 1976 -- a guy crossed the finish line in the primary against reagan. the reag
regularly to the international atomic energy agency in vienna. we continue to urge that the syrian regime be completely transparent about what it has been doing with respect to its nuclear program. with respect to access, we have long wanted that. we argued for it consistently. with the fighting in the area now, we would have to find out if it would want to go. >> you can address that at another time, the other question. thank you for the time. thank you, ambassador. >> thank you. we will go to david. >> thank you. thank you for convening this important hearing. thank you to the witnesses for their testimony. two questions. secretary carey has said the policy of the united states is to change aside = = assad's -- assad's calculations. i would like your assessment as to whether or not there is any evidence he has begun to change his calculation in that direction and whether or not there is a set of individuals the opposition might be prepared to negotiate with and whether the geneva framework makes any sense or if there is any prospect for its -- for resolution. i want to also thank you fo
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7